HIDDEN INFLATION - "Fewer Sheets Needed to Get the job Done" (1 Viewer)

[Captain Adverse]

Toilet-Tissue 'Desheeting' Shrinks Rolls, Plumps Profits - Yahoo! Finance

So here we go, Kimberly-Clark Corp is bulking up toilet paper 15% but reducing the number of actual sheets by 13%. "Consumer products makers call this 'desheeting'—reducing the number of sheets of toilet paper or tissues in each package while holding retail prices constant."

The article goes on to say that this has been a common practice for many consumer products over the years, shrinking the amount you get in order to maintain prices. Examples included in the article: "A regular Snickers bar now weighs 1.86 ounces, down from 2.07 ounces in the past, and Tropicana Pure Premium orange juice is now sold in 59-ounce bottles, versus 64-ounce cartons prior to 2010."

Thus we begin to see what I like to call HIDDEN INFLATION.

Some may think it is funny, joke about "toilet paper;" but hasn't anyone else noticed this shrinkage in other products over the years? Not only shrinkage, but after a period of adjustment eventual increases in prices for these shrunken products? So while you pay the same or slightly higher price for any product, you are getting less and less of the actual product in each package. Yet economists, financial advisors, and our government keeps telling us our worthless money isn't causing inflation, just check consumer prices and see, they've only gone up a few percent each year.

I've been noticing this over time, but I am glad to find a recent article on the subject to post as proof positive on the issue. Proof positive that we are NOT getting what we think we are paying for; that our dollar is not maintaining its purchasing power; and that inflation, though HIDDEN by these practices, is growing rampantly.

Counter this you supporters of our current monetary system! Counter this you Greed is Good Capitalist naysayers who think we don’t need a minimum wage, much less a “living wage” for our workers. Shades of “let them eat cake!”

What do you have to say now? :waiting:

 

[Hatuey]

Okay, I laughed.

I can just see fat people rioting over this. "THEY STOLE 0.2grams FROM US! BURN THE FIT INFIDELS!"

..or people running out of the bathroom going "IF ONLY I HAD THAT 2% OF TOILET PAPER! I WOULDN'T HAVE USED MY THUMB."

Great article. Terrible examples.

 

[Captain Adverse]

Okay, I laughed.

I can just see fat people rioting over this. "THEY STOLE 0.2grams FROM US! BURN THE FIT INFIDELS!"

..or people running out of the bathroom going "IF ONLY I HAD THAT 2% OF TOILET PAPER! I WOULDN'T HAVE USED MY THUMB."

Great article. Terrible examples.

Read the whole article, it points out several products and that this is a common practice over the past decade. It's not the toilet paper, it's ALL consumer products. Either prices rise, or products are repackaged with less to maintain the same price. Either way, inflation. I don't think that is very funny at all.

 

[Hatuey]

Read the whole article, it points out several products and that this is a common practice over the past decade. It's not the toilet paper, it's ALL consumer products. Either prices rise, or products are repackaged with less to maintain the same price. Either way, inflation. I don't think that is very funny at all.

It's not all the consumer products. I bought 500 sheets of paper yesterday. They didn't get smaller. They're exact same weight, price, number as 10 years ago. Give or take 50 cents. Let's not get too concerned over something which companies would be doing in any situation. I remind you, companies are in it to increase profit; decrease manufacturing costs. If they can get away with giving you 2% less toilet paper at the same price in a good economy, they will.

 

[greyhat]

This article may highlight a common practice amongst consumer goods manufacturers; however to relate it to inflation is a bit of a stretch, at best it is statistical noise.

The most common measure of inflation is the CPI, which is an index that measures the change in price of a "market basket" of consumer goods and services; however the methodology used factors out such noise. This is because the index is actually comprised of multiple indexes for multiple categories across multiple areas.

I'm not arguing that what the article says doesn't affect people's wallet over time; however to say that this masks inflation measures isn't accurate. There plenty of other services where you "get more" and "pay less" now, computers for example. The average computer today is cheaper and more powerful and with more gizmos included than a decade ago.

 

[Visbek]

• Food and groceries are only a small part of the CPI basket of goods. A small increase in food prices (hidden as a drop in package size) isn't going to mean that "hidden inflation is rampant." Unless someone is sneakily selling houses with smaller square footage, and lying about car sizes.

• The basket also changes slightly based on what people are buying. If they buy more chips because the bags are smaller, that's going to get included. This might be tracked a little closer with "chained CPI," which recognizes that consumers react to price pressure -- e.g. if cereal increases in price, and consumers switch to oatmeal, chained CPI will update that faster than standard inflation measures. As a result, chained is slightly lower than standard.

• Your noticing that some products have shrunk package sizes hardly proves that there has been (for example) an annual, across-the-board, 3% reduction in package sizes.

• This practice pre-dates quantitative easing.

• The detractors of Fed policy don't expect small bumps in inflation; they expect very high rates or hyperinflation, mostly because they don't understand that we're still in a liquidity trap.

 

[Captain Adverse]

Yep, out come all the people making excuses. "Oh no this really isn't important...blah blah." "If you'll notice this has less effect than you think...blah blah." "Really, you are blowing it all out of proportion because I can still go to such and so and buy...blah blah."

Of course many of the prices for "basic goods" like eggs, milk, wheat, etc....that's all covered by that wonderful farm bill subsidy which uses our tax dollars to keep those prices "reasonable."

Then of course, once one manufacturer starts shrinkage others do. In fact I have a buddy who's worked for a major home products manufacturer for 16 years, and who happened to tell me this past weekend they were also shrinking their products...if I told you the name of the company you'd be surprised how many consumer products this would effect. they cover everything from toothpaste to snack products, skin care and hair products, and of course paper products like toilet paper, plates, towels, etc.

But I'm sure you all are sincere, just as sincere as people who buy into the government unemployment statistics which ignore hidden unemployment too. I'll be like chicken little crying that the sky is falling...until it actually falls.

 

[pinqy]

• The basket also changes slightly based on what people are buying. If they buy more chips because the bags are smaller, that's going to get included. This might be tracked a little closer with "chained CPI," which recognizes that consumers react to price pressure -- e.g. if cereal increases in price, and consumers switch to oatmeal, chained CPI will update that faster than standard inflation measures. As a result, chained is slightly lower than standard.

Sort of. The weights and basket are updated every 2 years, so current CPI is based on average of 2009-2010.

But as greyhat pointed out there is quality adjustment done every month for changes in items. So if a $1 Snickers bar goes from 2.07 oz to 1.86 oz, that would be recorded in the CPI as an 11.3% price increase.

 

[Hatuey]

Yep, out come all the people making excuses. "Oh no this really isn't important...blah blah." "If you'll notice this has less effect than you think...blah blah." "Really, you are blowing it all out of proportion because I can still go to such and so and buy...blah blah."

Nobody has made an excuse. As a matter of fact; people are simply telling you that this isn't really all that relevant to a discussion on inflation. An excuse would be "Yeah, but this inflation is fine because....".

To my knowledge; nobody has said anything of the sort. People have simply pointed out that's it's pretty irrelevant.

 

[Guy Incognito]

Give or take 50 cents.

Ok, I laughed. When it comes to toilet paper, fifty cents more than ten years ago is inflation. Geez...:roll:

 

[pinqy]

So while you pay the same or slightly higher price for any product, you are getting less and less of the actual product in each package. Yet economists, financial advisors, and our government keeps telling us our worthless money isn't causing inflation, just check consumer prices and see, they've only gone up a few percent each year.

Let me make a prediction. It's going to be pointed out several times, that that economists, statisticians, all the inflation numbers do take into account quality change in products such as shrinkage so that no, it's not hidden but accounted for, but you'll ignore it and keep saying it's hidden.

 

[Guy Incognito]

Sort of. The weights and basket are updated every 2 years, so current CPI is based on average of 2009-2010.

But as greyhat pointed out there is quality adjustment done every month for changes in items. So if a $1 Snickers bar goes from 2.07 oz to 1.86 oz, that would be recorded in the CPI as an 11.3% price increase.

How about when solid wood furniture becomes particle board? How about when brass or stainless steel becomes plastic?

 

[Captain Adverse]

To my knowledge; nobody has said anything of the sort. People have simply pointed out that's it's pretty irrelevant.

Dude, which is essentially the same thing. You either don't see or don't know how intelligence is gathered to help determine trends and make predictions. It's never going to be a "smoking gun," it's always going to be a little bit here, and a little more there...and you start to develop a picture. NOTHING is irrelevant if it has any effect on the issue you are monitoring. It's deeming things irrelevant or unimportant which makes you unprepared when the "crash" happens.

Fine, it's irrelevant to you. I can't make you think differently. :notlook:

All I can do is point it out... the rest is up to you.

 

[Captain Adverse]

Let me make a prediction. It's going to be pointed out several times, that that economists, statisticians, all the inflation numbers do take into account quality change in products such as shrinkage so that no, it's not hidden but accounted for, but you'll ignore it and keep saying it's hidden.

Aren't you the guy I butted heads with over hidden unemployment? Then you are completely correct; I say screw economists, statisticians and anyone else who works to maintain the propaganda that "our economy is doing swimmingly," thank you very much. :bs

 

[humbolt]

Explains the Weiner, anyway.

 

[pinqy]

How about when solid wood furniture becomes particle board? How about when brass or stainless steel becomes plastic?

Yes...of course. When the Economic Assistant goes out to collect the prices, s/he has a list in detail of exactly what is supposed to be priced. If there are any changes in size/composition/features etc, those are noted and the commodities analyst in DC will adjust the price changes. For something like wood to particle board or metal to plastic, they would call those non-substitutes, because they're nowhere near close.

 

[Captain Adverse]

How about when solid wood furniture becomes particle board? How about when brass or stainless steel becomes plastic?

Never fear, the apologists always come out with some excuse to show that you are not really getting less quality than you used to pay for...it'll all come right in the end. Of course you are still paying for cheap crap with essentially worthless money so it's all good right?

 

[ttwtt78640]

When shopping for grocery items one is wise to look at the unit price, not simply the price of a package. Even items like canned beans made by the same company have per ounce price variations - often the larger sized cans actually cost more per ounce, mainly because they stay on the grocer's shelves longer. While some products cost more for the same thing, others such as nearly all electronics now give you much more for little (if any) price increase. Many product's packaging has never made much sense, hot dogs normally come in packages of 10 yet the hot dog buns come in pacages of 8, meaning that unless you buy 40 you will have a mismatch.

 

[pinqy]

Aren't you the guy I butted heads with over hidden unemployment? Then you are completely correct; I say screw economists, statisticians and anyone else who works to maintain the propaganda that "our economy is doing swimmingly," thank you very much. :bs

So what were your feelings when those same economists and statisticians were publishing the data showing how bad the economy was getting in the recession?

 

[ttwtt78640]

How about when solid wood furniture becomes particle board? How about when brass or stainless steel becomes plastic?

Lite beer is a good example - that magic ingredient that lowers the calories per serving is water, so rare that the consumer never thought about simply adding their own.

 

[Captain Adverse]

This article may highlight a common practice amongst consumer goods manufacturers; however to relate it to inflation is a bit of a stretch, at best it is statistical noise.

The most common measure of inflation is the CPI, which is an index that measures the change in price of a "market basket" of consumer goods and services; however the methodology used factors out such noise. This is because the index is actually comprised of multiple indexes for multiple categories across multiple areas.

I'm not arguing that what the article says doesn't affect people's wallet over time; however to say that this masks inflation measures isn't accurate. There plenty of other services where you "get more" and "pay less" now, computers for example. The average computer today is cheaper and more powerful and with more gizmos included than a decade ago.

Perhaps, but what matters the prices of products sold as "luxuries?" You don't need a computer...I lived more than half my life without one. It's good for my job and I am glad one is there. It's fun to play on, like I am now. But I don't need it. What I need is food, clothing, shelter, hygiene products to keep me healthy, etc. I go to stores and see I'm paying more for less when I buy the things I need.

The fact that things that keep me entertained are cheaper? Sounds like how old Rome handled their citizens...plenty of circuses and make sure they get a little bread every now and then. That'll keep em calm.

 

[pinqy]

Never fear, the apologists always come out with some excuse to show that you are not really getting less quality than you used to pay for...it'll all come right in the end.

You want to make a bet on that? No one's going to say anything of the sort.

 

[Captain Adverse]

You want to make a bet on that? No one's going to say anything of the sort.

You already did... geez. Don't bother with me, I don't care what you think.

Wow, I just learned how to use the ignore function...my first ever ignore. Learn something new every day.

 

[Kushinator]

You already did... geez. Don't bother with me, I don't care what you think.

When a valid statement contradicts your belief system, ignore them! Might as well add me to that list....

 

[ttwtt78640]

Never fear, the apologists always come out with some excuse to show that you are not really getting less quality than you used to pay for...it'll all come right in the end. Of course you are still paying for cheap crap with essentially worthless money so it's all good right?

If it still sells and increases your profit is that not a sound business decision? You focus on the "greedy" producer and not the stupid consumer. If these reduced value/quantity products still sell well at the non-reduced price then who is the one responsible for that?